Reflexology on TV on Monday

[Danielle K]

The BBC has a new three part series series called "Alternative Therapies". It started last Monday with Hypnotherapy, and the next one covers reflexology. It will be aired on Monday evening on BBC2 at 9 pm.

"Kathy Sykes, professor of Science and Society at Bristol, examines alternative therapies in Europe and the US."

There is more information on what to expect in this programme at the following BBC link:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk13/mon.shtml

It will be intersting to see the conclusions. The one on hypotherapy was very interesting and on another post, a hypnotherapist has seen an upturn in business. However, I wonder if reflexology will not get such a positive report, as the above article. It sounds like there will be positive and negative conslusions - positive about the power of touch, but negative regarding the scientific communities view on reflexologists....

The final report the following week is on meditation .

 

[Stuart C]

I thought last nights programme on reflexology was quite interesting, it expelled a few of the myths that have grown up around this modality, like stimulating nerves which apparently aren’t there to be stimulated, the breaking down of the crystals which is how most of us were shown to perform reflexology, she did not go into the meridians, but as a lot of us know there are not enough meridian points in the feet to explain it away that way.

What was quite remarkable was she did not follow up the information presented by Dwight Byers the nephew of Eunice Ingham about its use as a diagnostic tool, personally I have always found it good at confirming things when presented with something before the scientific tests have been done.

So where does this leave reflexology, my personal understanding of reflexology is that it is a form of energy healing, it works the same as using a substitute when performing remote healing, if we used say a teddy to visually represent the person we are working on at the other side of the world, this allows us to connect and sense the areas that need attention.

This can also be done just as easily by just visualising the person is lying on our treatment couches, so this is the head, these are the shoulders, lungs, diaphragm etc.

In reflexology we use a pair of feet, we will visualise five zones on each foot to split the body into easily manageable parts, we will then start at the top and that is representative of the head, as we work down the feet we visualise and connect with all areas of the body.

We use a lot of intuition and empathy with reflexology, we often not only sense the area in the feet that is a visual representation of the part of the body we choose to work on, but we can often sense the problem at the same time in our own bodies, we can also receive information that goes far beyond the remit of reflexology to open up the problems to us, as we continue to work the areas we can feel the changes that are actually taking place within the body of the recipient.

 

[Aaron Michael]

I thought the program took quite a negative and sceptical viewpoint. The doctor was very quick to judge. Although at the end it was very interesting how she seemed to soften and was thinking about her own experiences of touch.

To be honest, if it works, who cares how it works! Many complementary therapies work in similar ways, and yes a big part of it is the time spent talking, the physical contact and the deep relaxation.

When the body is allowed to relax in this way, amazing things can happen, the body can heal itself. The added value of the actual therapy is a fantastic bonus.

I wonder if this program has anything to do with the BBC removing complementary therapies from its websites?!!

 

[yyjnzkgw]

Our views are getting divided between 2 threads now! There's another thread on this started with some good discussion going on at the following too:

http://www.massageplanet.net/forum/showthread.php?t=52554

My own thoughts are that the programme was much as I expected. Not damaging to reflexology, finding benefits of touch therapies, but not scientifically proven. Like Paul, I was disappointed not to hear more from Dwight Byers on his aunt's work into Zone Therapy and the research and results.

Similar discussion on the other thread.......

 

[Fuzz]

Did anyone see The One Show tonight? Another doctor dismissing reflexology because she couldn't prove how it works.

I wonder, does this mean that doctors and scientists cannot be Christians and you'll not see them in church. If they go, does this mean they believe in God? Yet they can't prove God actually exists can they?

 

[xodgmdhc]

I hope I am wrong but I do feel these doctors are jealous we complementary therapists manage to help clients! All they can do is dish out pills with side effects. Yes, I realise they are clever people and much of what they do is life saving, but they do not have the time to actually provide holistic care. People need to feel special and cared for.

Prevention is better than cure. I get annoyed when they call it 'Alternative' when it is complementary. As we are complementing them why don't they accept that there is a real need for us?

Why do they need scientific evidence? The sheer numbers who use complementary therapies speaks for itself.

That doctor on the One Show just dismissed reflexology out of hand. I never liked her anyway!

I could ramble on for ages as I get so cross about these dismissive comments on TV

Maggie xx

 

[tfezhuubiunidhexp]

hi
i cant believe i missed this. i kept reminding myself and totally forgot in the end. does anyone no if it'll be on again?

thanks
jh x

 

[Jaasit]

You can view it here, Ive just watched it:

View here

 

[tron]

this is one thing I hate about the Scientific world- if they cant prove it -it can be real Grrrrr!!!

 

[Gizmo13]

It would be interesting to ask this doctor what she thinks when one of those occurences of a patient miraculously being cured against all odds happens. Would she say that the person isn't cured because she couldn't explain how it happened?


Well some scientists are religious too, so let's not knock them all. Stephen Hawkins has undergone almost all his research and theorising in order to try and understand God (whatever God is to him). There are also other theoretical physicists who research into the area of quantum theories and spiritual beliefs to gain an understanding between the two.


Hmmm, well it's not always that they can't prove it. In a lot of cases, science is purely theoretical and the only proof is that it can be shown to consistently (either 100% of the time or a high percentage of the time) follow an expected outcome based on mathematical calculations. Even then it will only be accepted by the scientific community if it is peer reviewed meaning that some 'old school' scientists somewhere have to get together and say they like it. If they don't accept it then it false (or so they say).

For example, Scientists have never seen an electron. They have named a theoretical 'particle' (using the term loosely) because there is something that acts in a consistent way under certain scientific conditions.

Likewise for those of us practicing complementary therapies, we perform some action in a certain way expecting certain outcomes, and the majority of the time those outcomes happen. We can't necessarily explain why they happen or put mathematics to it or even carry out numerous double-blind testing studies to show it, because we are working in a holistic manner, dealing with everything as a whole rather than a specific focus which means that we are dealing with something very complex; and as for research we just don't have the funding to perform something like that, unlike e.g. the pharmaceutical companies who have lots of money from ripping off countries with their extortionate products (products which have a multitude of side effects, but are still accepted as 'working' because they may possibly relieve symptoms of an illness and in some cases if you're lucky, cure the cause)

(rant over)

Love and Reiki Hugs

 

[Nadz46]

Hey a lot of Science is not proved either some of it is just theory that they 'think' works.......the atom for instance....they have never seen an atom split so how can they make diagrams of it and teach based upon it???? So in that case parts of what they teach is not real!!

and parts of Physics is just 'theory'.

 

[lz1496]

Quite strange the way they accept the word placebo, this word covers something that works but they don't understand why or how it works but they are quite happy to accept it.

 

[Rafal Z]

A very good point Paul.

 

[DMW]

Hi there chaps

This is the sort of thing that drives me nuts about some doctors and scientists the way their minds are closed to anything that can't be prooved! What they forget is that the science they love so much is constantly finding and prooving new things itself so what can't be prooved today could well be prooved tomorrow!

It was clear that the woman presenting this program had decided half an hour into the program that she couldn't proove anything so she mooved on to massage and cuddle sessions in LA.

Now I quite like a bit of science and find it fasinating but it's not the be all and end all, I have a medical problem that science hasn't been able to deal with just yet so I thank god for reflexology and reiki and the like because they do help with things that science cant!

Rant over

Love Scrivo x

 

[ExpertHelp]

Hi ya all

Eventhough Prof. Kathy Thingy was biased, it could of been a lot worse. Some of the questions I felt was valid. There is many aspects of reflexology I question, and I have developed my own ideas and theories. For example, I have questioned for many years the idea of crystal deposits blocking the dynamic flow of bio-electrical energy. There is far more to reflexology than this outdated theory.

Funny how she went to America to look at the massage and cortisol research. Similiar research has been done in the UK with reflexology:

Complementary Therapy Clinical Practice 2007 Aug. 13 (3) 137-45
Evaluation of anxiety, salivary cortisol and melatonin secretion following reflexology: A pilot study in healthy individuals. McVicar AJ et al.

I'm far more concerned about the totally biased opinion of Dr. Sarah Jarvis on the ONE programme on Tuesday. (Had to watch on the BBC iplayer late night as I was busy massaging). Awful!

Best Wishes

Reflex Pixie

 

[C Plus Plus]

Hi Reiki Pixie


I didn't actualy see the one show as I was at my Reflexology course! I am not surprised tho the regular doctor on there is awful, so patronizing I have ended up shouting at the TV when she's on.

I just hope that people who could have been helped with Reflexology aren't put off by these programs!

Love Scrivo xxx

 

[nsw]

Dr Jarvis really does come out with some tosh. I can't prove it so it doesn't exist, doesn't that seem a bit childish. I can't make the train go so it doesn't work... well could it not be that you need to look a bit harder for the switch? Tell any of the many and various faiths around that their god doesn't exist because she can't prove it and watch the fallout.

I'd love to see scientific fact behind the theory, but the lack of it doesn't stop me believing it works. I'm relatively new to compelementary therapies and am by nature a sceptical beast, but it's a bit like faith, I know it brings relief and eases stresses and strains, I don't know how but it does and that's as much as I need for now.

 

[pierced_parrot]

I just wanted to say I have never been Reflexology before and came away from watching the TV show curious & wanting to try it out - Ive booked my first session for next week. The comment 'it feels like an internal massage' particularly stood out in my head.

Just reading some of the comments, I think criticising science/scientists in general is abit harsh. (and also throwing in the god argument isnt that helpful in these types of discussions (no offence intended but its irrelevant.))

I have benefitted immensely from some other comp therapies (Acupuncture and AlexTech) and I do think it is the failure or the governing bodies of the alternative therapies not to produce scientific evidence to prove how good they can be. I know money is the issue but I am surprised of how 'Biofeedback' is ignored in scientifically proving the use of comp therapies.
when I started Alex Tech I also went to a Biofeedback practitioner who put my EMG, temp, etc. on a giant computer screen. Each week I saw the muscle tension decrease and everything improve. 'The alexander technique is working' he used to say. Not only did I feel better but I had SCIENTIFIC evidence to prove it worked- and Im not rich!

One thing I programme mentioned that I thought was an excellent point (which I thing gets forgotten) is 'The fear of pain'. If somebody addresses/massages/releases areas of the body we dont normally like thinking about it can make such a huge difference the our health.

It would be interesting if there has been an upturn/or downturn in trade in Reflexology since the TV show.

 

[mur2d2]

Only 1 of my regular clients has commented on the programme and she felt that it lost the plot!

As for affecting trade, Matty30, it is too soon to say as the programme was shown during the Easter hols which tends to be a quieter couple of weeks.
We'll have to see how April goes!

 

[brin]

Well, I've had a few more calls than usual for reflexology since the televised shows, so I guess it's tuned people into it rather than put them off, which has surprised me.

The woman who did the programme on Reflexology, Sykes I think her name is, is a media graduate and has nothing to do with science or health, so she is obviously speaking from an informed point of view. (Maybe not)